Windows and door markets typically have two primary main locking cylinders used to secure the windows and doors in a locked position. One such system is referred to as the American cylinder and the other system is referred to as the European cylinder. The European cylinder is also referred to as the Profile cylinder.
The American cylinder lock is widely used in the United States as a standard cylinder lock. It generally is small and mounts from behind the door hardware. A flat tail piece extends from behind the mechanism of the American cylinder lock and extends into a mortise receiver which is coupled to the internal locking system. The locking system typically drives a bolt into a door jamb (not shown) thus locking the door. The mortise may include a deadbolt and other latching mechanisms as determined by the manufacturer or user of the locking system.
In contrast to the American cylinder, the European cylinder typically has no tail piece and in order to accommodate different door thicknesses, an entire new locking cylinder must be manufactured and fitted to the locking system. Because there are different door thicknesses as manufactured by a variety of companies, so the different sized European cylinders must be manufactured and stocked. Accordingly, it would be advantageous to be able to convert a mortise lock system that accommodates a European cylinder to also be able to receive the American type cylinder regardless of the door thickness.
The apparatus of the present disclosure must also be of construction which is both durable and long lasting, and it should also require little or no maintenance to be provided by the user throughout its operating lifetime. In order to enhance the market appeal of the apparatus of the present disclosure, it should also be of inexpensive construction to thereby afford it the broadest possible market. Finally, it is desirable that all of the aforesaid advantages are achieved without incurring any substantial relative disadvantage.
The subject matter discussed in this background of the invention section should not be assumed to be prior art merely as a result of its mention in the background of the invention section. Similarly, a problem mentioned in the background of the invention section or associated with the subject matter of the background of the invention section should not be assumed to have been previously recognized in the prior art. The subject matter in the background of the invention section merely represents different approaches, which in and of themselves may also be inventions.